Abdominal bloating and distension are 2 of the most commonly reported gastrointestinal symptoms. Abdominal bloating is characterized by symptoms of trapped gas, abdominal pressure, and fullness. Abdominal distension is defined as a measurable increase in abdominal girth. These symptoms frequently co-exist, although they can occur separately. Defined by Rome IV criteria, functional abdominal bloating and distension commonly coincide with other functional gastrointestinal disorders, such as functional dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, and functional constipation. Abdominal bloating and distension can develop for multiple reasons, including food intolerances, a previous infection that perturbed the intestinal microbiota, disordered visceral sensation, delayed intestinal transit, or an abnormal viscero-somatic reflux. Treatment can be challenging to patients and providers-no regimen has been consistently successful. Successful treatment involves identifying the etiology, assessing severity, educating and reassuring patients, and setting expectations. Therapeutic options include dietary changes, probiotics, antibiotics, prokinetic agents, antispasmodics, neuromodulators, and biofeedback. We review the epidemiology and effects of chronic bloating and distension and pathophysiology, discuss appropriate diagnostic strategies, and assess available treatment options.

No abstract

In our patients, the incidence of GIB for those on warfarin was more than four times that for those on NOACs. Blood transfusions for GIB were more common in warfarin patients, and no NOAC patients died of GIB. In contrast to early reports, our findings suggest that the risk of GIB and subsequent complications is considerably lower for patients on NOACs than for patients on warfarin.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal (GI) condition involving numerous potential causative factors (e.g. alterations in gut microbiota, motility, brain–gut axis). Several interventions are available for the management of patients with IBS, but no universal management algorithm currently exists. The aim of this article is to review interventions that may be considered in the management of patients with IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D). Nonpharmacological interventions include dietary and lifestyle modification, which are generally used as first-line therapy. Probiotics have demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with IBS, but studies are inconsistent in strains examined, dosing, and treatment duration. Psychological therapies (e.g. cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnotherapy) also may improve IBS symptoms. Pharmacological interventions for the management of IBS-D include the US Food and Drug Administration–approved agents eluxadoline, rifaximin, and alosetron, as well as loperamide, smooth muscle antispasmodics, bile acid sequestrants, and antidepressants (i.e. tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). Eluxadoline and rifaximin have been shown to improve abdominal pain and stool consistency in patients with IBS-D. In addition, data indicate that alosetron improves IBS symptoms; however, it is approved only for women with severe IBS-D. Of the three approved agents, rifaximin has the most favorable safety profile. The risk–benefit ratio is an important consideration with every medication, but is especially important in the treatment of functional GI disorders such as IBS-D. Thus, the most troublesome symptoms, quality of life, symptom intensity, and individual patient preferences should be considered when formulating a management plan for patients with IBS-D.

Background/AimsStricture formation is a common complication after endoscopic mucosal resection. Predictors of stricture formation have not been well studied.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, observational, descriptive study by using a prospective endoscopic mucosal resection database in a tertiary referral center. For each patient, we extracted the age, sex, lesion size, use of ablative therapy, and detection of esophageal strictures. The primary outcome was the presence of esophageal stricture at follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the association between the primary outcome and predictors.ResultsOf 136 patients, 27% (n=37) had esophageal strictures. Thirty-two percent (n=44) needed endoscopic dilation to relieve dysphagia (median, 2; range, 1 to 8). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the size of the lesion excised is associated with increased odds of having a stricture (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.3; p=0.01), when controlling for age, sex, and ablative modalities. Similarly, the number of lesions removed in the index procedure was associated with increased odds of developing a stricture (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 4.2; p=0.007).ConclusionsStricture formation after esophageal endoscopic mucosal resection is common. Risk factors for stricture formation include large mucosal resections and the resection of multiple lesions on the initial procedure.

Disorders of gastric motor and sensory function affect 10%-20% of the world’s population and adversely impact nutrition, quality of life, work productivity, and health care costs. Classifying these disorders can be challenging given the heterogeneity of symptom presentation, the presence of symptoms unexplained by endoscopic, radiographic and/or laboratory evaluation, and overlap with other luminal gastrointestinal disorders. Accurately diagnosing these highly prevalent disorders relies upon an understanding of epidemiology and risk factors, the ability to take a careful clinical history focused on symptoms, and the presence of predisposing medical, surgical, and psychological conditions. A variety of diagnostic studies are now available to assess gastric motor function and identify maladaptive relaxation, accommodation, and abnormal sensation. FDA-approved treatment options are limited and thus many patients undergo a series of empirical treatment trials that target individual symptoms, often without much benefit. This article provides updated recommendations for identifying and classifying the most common gastric motor and sensory disorders using currently accepted diagnostic tests, and provides a brief supplemental overview on treatment options. “Things sweet to taste prove in digestion sour.” –Shakespeare, Richard II, 1595.

Purpose of review This review assesses the relationship between gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia, in light of recent research assessing cause, pathophysiology and treatment. Recent findings The Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) lacks the ability to readily distinguish functional dyspepsia from gastroparesis based on symptoms. Although prior studies found that the extent of delay in gastric emptying did not accurately predict severity of symptoms, when optimally measured, delayed gastric emptying may in fact correlate with gastroparesis symptoms. Enteric dysmotility may be an important risk factor for gastroparesis. Altered central processing may play a role in symptom generation for both gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia based on functional brain MRI. Treatment directed towards reducing low-grade inflammation and improving mucosal barrier function in the duodenum may represent a novel therapeutic target for functional dyspepsia, whereas gastric peroral endoscopy myotomy (G-POEM) remains a promising intervention for refractory gastroparesis. Summary Abnormalities on functional MRI of the brain have been identified in patients with functional dyspepsia and gastroparesis. Small bowel dysmotility and duodenal barrier dysfunction have been implicated in the pathophysiology of gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia, respectively. New treatments for functional dyspepsia may target low-grade duodenal inflammation and barrier dysfunction. The pylorus remains a target in gastroparesis.

The presence of PFO did not have a negative impact on perioperative LT outcomes.